If A fuller integration of haredim into the IDF and economic spheres is to take place, it is necessary that the pragmatists prevail.

I write as someone who is convinced that haredim will one day make large
contributions both to the IDF and to the Israeli economy.

When that day
will dawn, however, depends to a large extent on the form of the national debate
currently taking place under the slogan “equality of the burden” and, more
importantly, on the direction the next government takes with respect to the
issue.

There are two basic ways to approach the issue of haredi service.
The first is as a matter of high principle. The second is as a practical matter.
The first approach is currently represented by Yair Lapid, who spent his time in
the IDF training for a career in journalism; the second is represented by former
chief of staff Moshe Ya’alon.

The argument of high principle was put to
me last week by moderator Leah Zinder at the outset of a TV debate on the draft
with Yohanan Plesner: “More and more Israelis are asking themselves whether it’s
fair that young men like Yohanan Plesner [who served in an elite combat unit]
should go at the age of 18, risk their lives, endure great hardship, in order to
defend us – all of us – while at the same time 18-year-old yeshiva students are
exempted from that burden. Is that fair?” she asked.

I cannot refute the
“fairness” argument on its own terms. Any answer would require accepting
premises that the general public does not. The fairness argument need not deny
that Torah learning is crucial to preserving our identity as a people or to our
knowing what we are fighting for. Proponents could even theoretically
acknowledge that Torah learning contributes to the Divine protection without
which Israel’s survival since 1948 is hard to explain.

Rather, it focuses
on an emotional argument – no one was ever killed studying Torah in a study hall
– and a fundamental distinction between IDF recruits and yeshiva students, no
matter how dedicated. A soldier serving in the IDF is serving at the compulsion
of the state (even though he might have volunteered absent that compulsion); a
yeshiva student is doing exactly what he professes to want to do most – studying
Torah. He is not under compulsion.

Yet the haredi public hears a
different message: “We will break you until you submit to the dictates of the
state. It does not matter whether the IDF wants or needs you or is capable of
absorbing you. The only thing that matters is that you cannot do what you want
at age 18 and that you close your Talmud.”

That understanding is
reinforced every time we hear: “We understand why you can’t serve in IDF, but
why can’t you do national service?” Most forms of national service would be
make-work, costing the state far more than they are worth. And closing one’s
Talmud to perform such tasks would be a bigger disgrace to Torah in a way that
serving as a combat soldier is not.

THE PRACTICAL approach starts from a
different place. It, too, admits that there is a problem: As haredim constitute
an ever larger share of each draft cohort, the IDF will face serious manpower
shortages. Moreover, as the percentage of those not serving grows, the
rest of the population will not submit to a draft.

But this approach
acknowledges that arrangements that have been in place for 64 years will not be
changed overnight. It further acknowledges that there is a lot of mutual
suspicion, and “confidence-building” steps will be required. In particular, the
haredi community must be convinced that the goal of the larger society is not to
destroy Torah learning and with it the haredi community for whom the study of
Torah is the highest societal value. The haredim must be assured that service in
the IDF is not designed to fashion them into “new Jews,” the creation of which
was indeed the highest aspiration of many of the founding fathers of
Zionism.

The practical approach searches for points on which there is a
wide consensus. One point of general agreement is that birth into a
haredi home does not confer an automatic exemption from national service. Most
haredim agree that those not learning Torah should theoretically serve in the
IDF. At the same time, most Israeli Jews would agree that the state should not
place citizens in frameworks in which they are compelled to transgress their
deepest religious convictions. Nor should it place young people in frameworks
that make it unlikely that they can sustain their religious
identity.

Pragmatists also recognize that the haredi community has been
undergoing rapid change over the last decade. Large numbers of haredim
are seeking vocational and academic education. Approximately 10,000
haredim are currently enrolled in academic degree granting programs. In
addition, there has been a substantial jump in the number of haredi men serving
in the IDF – both unmarried men of draft age, who are not interested in or are
for whatever reason not suited to the rigors of a full day of yeshiva studies,
and older married men in the various Shahar programs, in which they are trained
in a variety of technical fields.

The focus of the pragmatists is on
finding ways to encourage the present trends and expand the points of entry into
the IDF or some other form of national service for haredim. They are thinking
about new frameworks – e.g. a hesder track for haredim – and expansion of
programs that offer haredim the training they seek and help the IDF meet some of
its critical needs. Their concern is not primarily with unmarried
18-year-olds.

Of no less concern to the pragmatists is the ability and
the eagerness of the army to absorb large numbers of haredim in suitable
frameworks, like the current Nahal Haredi. Both are far from certain. At
present, the number of young men from haredi homes seeking to enlist is greater
than the IDF’s ability to integrate them. The IDF has consistently resisted
efforts to expand Nahal Haredi by adding new units and is turning away potential
recruits.

Rabbi Yoel Schwartz, one of the moving forces behind Nahal
Haredi, said in a recent interview that the IDF has too often shown itself
unable to keep its promises to haredi recruits. An elite frogmen unit for
haredim was closed shortly after opening for that reason.

AS LONG as the
debate is being conducted in the context of election campaigns and the posturing
of coalition negotiations, the voices of those who stand on principle will be
dominant. That is not surprising. The “principled position” is easily
articulated and emotionally appealing, and its negative consequences are less
immediately obvious.

The pragmatists are more likely to be found in the
manpower division of the army or working behind the scenes in the Knesset. Any
compromises they might work out would be messy and fail to satisfy just about
everyone.

Yet, if a fuller integration of haredim into the IDF and
economic spheres is to take place, it is necessary that the pragmatists prevail.
If the battle becomes an ideological one – submission versus resistance – the
IDF will become in haredi eyes an instrument of coercion. Haredim will
never agree that the laws of the state take precedence over those of God. No
religious person, no matter what his religion, could agree to that proposition,
even as he acknowledges the right of the state to punish him for his civil
disobedience.

Reversal of the growing acceptance of the IDF by the haredi
public would be a tragedy for both the State of Israel and the haredi community.
It would bring to a halt the trend toward greater haredi
integration.

Nahal Haredi has proven to be of great benefit for many
young men from haredi homes who never found themselves in the mainstream yeshiva
system. And the Shahar programs have helped make the IDF the optimal employer
for haredi married men seeking to support their families. The Shahar programs
provide on-the-job training in technical fields that ever larger numbers of
haredim seek. And the work environment in the IDF for married haredi men is in
many respects more suitable than they would find in the private sector. Those in
the Shahar programs with whom I’ve spoken have generally expressed a high degree
of satisfaction.

At the same time, haredim offer a potential solution to
the IDF’s most critical manpower needs. Modern warfare is fought as much on the
computer as on the battle front, and some of the greatest current manpower needs
of the IDF are in technical areas. Young draftees, who in general leave the IDF
after three years, are expensive to train. Married haredim are for that
reason often a better investment for the IDF. They tend to put a greater
emphasis on job stability and work conditions over obtaining the highest
possible salary, and the re-enlistment rates for the Shahar programs have been
among the highest in the IDF.

Standing on principle is always satisfying
– for those on both sides of the barricades. But that satisfaction will be
short-lived and any victories Pyrrhic if they prevent the pragmatists on both
sides from working things out.

The writer is director of Jewish Media
Resources, has written a regular column in The Jerusalem Post Magazine since
1997 and is the author of eight biographies of modern Jewish
leaders.

Your comment must be approved by a moderator before being published on JPost.com.
Disqus users can post comments automatically.

Comments must adhere to our Talkback policy. If you believe that a comment has breached the Talkback policy, please press the flag icon to bring it to the attention of our moderation team.